California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Martinez, 20 Cal.4th 225, 83 Cal.Rptr.2d 533, 973 P.2d 512 (Cal. 1999):
Rather, section 207(a) refers to "kidnapping" in the same respect section 209(b)(1) uses the word "kidnaps," which has been interpreted to require consideration of the "scope and nature" of the movement and the increased risk of harm to the victim. (People v. Daniels, supra, 71 Cal.2d at pp. 1131, fn. 5, 1139, 80 Cal.Rptr. 897, 459 P.2d 225.) The two prongs of aggravated kidnapping are not distinct, but interrelated, because a trier of fact cannot consider the significance of the victim's changed environment without also considering whether that change resulted in an increase in the risk of harm to the victim. Thus, for simple kidnapping asportation, movement that is "substantial in character" arguably should include some consideration of the "scope and nature" of the movement or changed environment, and any increased risk of harm.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.